What's in a Word?

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: KJV

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture given by inspiration of God is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: IV

At first blush these passages look pretty much alike, but look again. Notice the absence of the word "is" in the IV. (Get thee behind me, Bill Clinton!) Further on, the word "and" comes before "is". This changes the meaning of the IV drastically from KJV. How, you may ask. Well, if you insert the words "that is" between "scripture" and"given" you'll see the change: All scripture that is given by inspiration of God is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:".

What does that mean? By default that implies some scripture is not given by inspiration of God, according to the IV. What scripture would that be? According to Mr. Strong, scripture is a holy writ. Mr. Webster states "the Books of the Bible." But we can't go along with Mr. W. because, according to Joseph Smith, the three standard books are considered scripture. However, this presents a dilemma: the Book of Commandments would have been considered scripture, but was mostly destroyed. The Doctrine and Covenants is considered scripture, but contains sections which have been consigned to the Appendix because they are no longer considered—scripture. Does this mean that at one time these sections were inspired by God but that He changed His mind? Ludicrous as it sounds that's exactly the way it seems, because that's exactly what the RLDS/Restored Church did. Sections of the Doctrine and Covenants have been hop-scotching around since the first "Thus saith the Lord" erupted from the mouth of the prophet.

But the real quandary lies in the implication that some "scripture" is not inspired of God. But I thought scripture was holy. And I thought the Inspired Version was—inspired. So which part of inspired is not inspired? If every word Joseph put into the Inspired Version was inspired, fine. But why would this disclaimer be slipped in? If every word he put into the D&C is not inspired, where did he draw the line? By what authority? What about sections which have been added since his death? Again, whose authority? This verse seems to leave "wiggle room" for whatever has come forth since the beginning of the church. Convenient.

In His Love

Seeker